Friday, Sept. 9, 2011
Ten Years Later, It's Time to 'Broaden the Context'
Ten years ago this week, I, like many living in Washington at the time, was fleeing my office building. In those minutes of mayhem, I knew only what the police were screaming: Get out fast, because we're being attacked by terrorists.
In the years since 9/11, we've learned a lot about that awful day—and about ourselves.
We've learned, for instance, about the attack's mechanics—we know which particular terrorists orchestrated it and how many lives those mass murderers tragically destroyed. We also know about 9/11's long-term legacy—we have health care data showing that it created a kind of mass post-traumatic stress disorder, and we have evidence that it generated a significant rise in anti-Muslim bigotry. And, of course, we've learned that our government can turn catastrophes like 9/11 into political weapons that successfully coerce America into supporting wars and relinquishing civil liberties.
Yet, despite all of this new knowledge, we still don't know how to explain 9/11 to the next generation. As the magazine Education Week reports, "Fewer than half the states explicitly identify the 9/11 attacks in their high school standards for social studies"—and the relatively few schools that do discuss 9/11 often spend just a few minutes on it.
As a result, reports the magazine, "Many students today may have only vague notions of 9/11, since they were young or not even born when the attacks occurred." Worse, those "vague notions" are often defined by America's crude popular culture.
"Kids are no longer coming into the classroom as a blank slate—they have something they've been told [about 9/11] at home, at church, on Facebook, Twitter," says the University of Texas's Middle Eastern studies expert Christopher Rose, who adds that this leaves many children wrongly believing that "[Muslims] are all crazy—they all hate us."
Clearly, many schools are afraid that 9/11 is too touchy a topic, and that no matter how educators might address it, they would inevitably face parental ire. To know that fear is legitimate is to imagine being a teacher trying to follow the National September 11 Memorial and Museum, which asks Americans to "raise complex questions" and "broaden the context for understanding the 9/11 attacks." Pursuing such a worthy goal in a classroom would mean informing kids about taboo truths.
Children would have to be told, for instance, about how the U.S. government funded the Afghan mujahadeen, elements of which ultimately supported the group that orchestrated 9/11 attacks. They would have to learn about how America's meddling in the Islamic world (invasions, occupations, support for brutal dictators, etc.) has inspired what the CIA calls retributive "blowback" from terrorists. And kids would have to hear about how 9/11 was used as a justification by American politicians to invade Iraq and kill thousands of innocent Iraqis, even though that country had nothing to do with 9/11.
No doubt, reciting these facts typically gets one vilified by saber-rattling ideologues who want 9/11 to serve only as a no-questions-asked rationale for more war and bigotry. And so schools, understandably—and unfortunately—avoid the topic, even though children need to know these facts to properly "broaden the context."
Thus, we arrive at the implicit challenge of this week's 9/11 anniversary: to grow up. That means finally rejecting the culture of fear, demagoguery and intimidation and instead beginning a more mature dialogue about uncomfortable truths.
A decade after the attacks, such a conversation is long overdue—but it cannot occur in our schools until it starts happening throughout all of American society.
David Sirota is best-selling author of the new book "Back to Our Future: How the 1980s Explain the World We Live In Now." He hosts the morning show on AM760 in Colorado. Email him at ds@davidsirota.com, follow him on Twitter @davidsirota or visit his website at DavidSirota.com.
In the years since 9/11, we've learned a lot about that awful day—and about ourselves.
We've learned, for instance, about the attack's mechanics—we know which particular terrorists orchestrated it and how many lives those mass murderers tragically destroyed. We also know about 9/11's long-term legacy—we have health care data showing that it created a kind of mass post-traumatic stress disorder, and we have evidence that it generated a significant rise in anti-Muslim bigotry. And, of course, we've learned that our government can turn catastrophes like 9/11 into political weapons that successfully coerce America into supporting wars and relinquishing civil liberties.
Yet, despite all of this new knowledge, we still don't know how to explain 9/11 to the next generation. As the magazine Education Week reports, "Fewer than half the states explicitly identify the 9/11 attacks in their high school standards for social studies"—and the relatively few schools that do discuss 9/11 often spend just a few minutes on it.
As a result, reports the magazine, "Many students today may have only vague notions of 9/11, since they were young or not even born when the attacks occurred." Worse, those "vague notions" are often defined by America's crude popular culture.
"Kids are no longer coming into the classroom as a blank slate—they have something they've been told [about 9/11] at home, at church, on Facebook, Twitter," says the University of Texas's Middle Eastern studies expert Christopher Rose, who adds that this leaves many children wrongly believing that "[Muslims] are all crazy—they all hate us."
Clearly, many schools are afraid that 9/11 is too touchy a topic, and that no matter how educators might address it, they would inevitably face parental ire. To know that fear is legitimate is to imagine being a teacher trying to follow the National September 11 Memorial and Museum, which asks Americans to "raise complex questions" and "broaden the context for understanding the 9/11 attacks." Pursuing such a worthy goal in a classroom would mean informing kids about taboo truths.
Children would have to be told, for instance, about how the U.S. government funded the Afghan mujahadeen, elements of which ultimately supported the group that orchestrated 9/11 attacks. They would have to learn about how America's meddling in the Islamic world (invasions, occupations, support for brutal dictators, etc.) has inspired what the CIA calls retributive "blowback" from terrorists. And kids would have to hear about how 9/11 was used as a justification by American politicians to invade Iraq and kill thousands of innocent Iraqis, even though that country had nothing to do with 9/11.
No doubt, reciting these facts typically gets one vilified by saber-rattling ideologues who want 9/11 to serve only as a no-questions-asked rationale for more war and bigotry. And so schools, understandably—and unfortunately—avoid the topic, even though children need to know these facts to properly "broaden the context."
Thus, we arrive at the implicit challenge of this week's 9/11 anniversary: to grow up. That means finally rejecting the culture of fear, demagoguery and intimidation and instead beginning a more mature dialogue about uncomfortable truths.
A decade after the attacks, such a conversation is long overdue—but it cannot occur in our schools until it starts happening throughout all of American society.
David Sirota is best-selling author of the new book "Back to Our Future: How the 1980s Explain the World We Live In Now." He hosts the morning show on AM760 in Colorado. Email him at ds@davidsirota.com, follow him on Twitter @davidsirota or visit his website at DavidSirota.com.
© 2011 CREATORS.COM
Remember Obama's little invasion of Pakistan and the taking out of Osama Bin Laden? Done quickly, not talked about in any real length, and we got our butts out of Pakistan. -- The 9/11 tragedy really should be knocked to the back burner as quick as possible. It was nothing more than a large organized crime attack, not so different than a gangland revenge massacre.
911 was NOT a Muslim cultural attack on Christianity, Bin Laden merely used the hot-headed devotion of a small Muslim following to do his dirty work. In my opinion, the true attack was on America's Corporate interference in world affairs, learned from his years of watching his Saudi elders handle their oil dealings with the US Corporations. His attack was on the World TRADE Center, not on the Empire State bldg or Statue of Liberty. His inclusion of the Pentagon, and maybe the Whitehouse were because the American presidency commits our military to carry out these pro-corporate games.
Bush followed on into Iraq because of the oil there. Sadam Hussein had to be knocked down because he wanted his country's oil to go to the highest bidder, even if it be China or Europe, not be locked into a sweet deal of "mineral rights signed over" to a US Oil company.
Why do I say this? I just heard this morning on an investment program, that when an investor buys oil stock, the choice of company is to be picked by "when you spend $100, how many barrels of oil does it represent?". Instead of all oil companies being equal with the current spot price of oil, there was a wide variance between companies, about 3 to 1, of how many barrels that $100 was getting you, and it was all far more than 1-2 barrels.
In Iraq, we were supposed to set up a deal where a private oil company could get that oil at something like $10 a barrel and then resell it at $100 or more by holding back on how fast we chose to pump it out. Sadam stood in the way of that.
On the bright side is "Muslim Spring". The idea that once Muslim people get a taste of middle class life, and therefore have something to lose personally, their hatred of "The Ugly American" will lessen.